quote:Your claim, on the other hand, appears to be that the jokes are merely clever for the sake of cleverness, and not really making any sort of point at all.
I think they're meant to be self-contained; I don't think they're part of a larger "rootless" theme. In fact, I think Adams might well have been horrified by the suggestion.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: I think they're meant to be self-contained; I don't think they're part of a larger "rootless" theme. In fact, I think Adams might well have been horrified by the suggestion.
I don't know whether he'd have been horrified or not. I also don't think it makes a smidgen of difference. Posts: 884 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Though I agree with you, did your 12th grade English teacher not lecture you on referring to a writer you have not met by his first name?
If English teachers are spending class time lecturing about things like that, I can't say I'd blame students for not seeing the value in English class...
The voice you use in your writing contributes to your credibility. I had a teacher who found that important. There is no subject that cannot be made interesting, by the right teacher. It's a very valid point of criticism when dealing with the work of a 17 year old writer. Have you read a paper by a 17 year old recently? Awareness of one's own voice is something that can be helped along by the use of specific examples. In my class, this happened to be one, and I remember it.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Your claim, on the other hand, appears to be that the jokes are merely clever for the sake of cleverness, and not really making any sort of point at all.
I think they're meant to be self-contained; I don't think they're part of a larger "rootless" theme. In fact, I think Adams might well have been horrified by the suggestion.
Adams isn't necessarily the authority on the final meaning of his own work. It takes time, but eventually the discrete characteristics of his interests and expressive needs will become clearer and clearer to readers as time marches on, and styles change. The words on the page are out of his hands, and if they inspire readings of his work that he might not have agreed with- that's his fault, but there's nothing to be done about it, other than pointing out why they might be wrong.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Adams isn't necessarily the authority on the final meaning of his own work.
I was an English major, you know. So let me give you a heartfelt slap on this one, since you just made me flash back to all the litcrit BS I had to survive in college. Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Adams isn't necessarily the authority on the final meaning of his own work.
I was an English major, you know. So let me give you a heartfelt slap on this one, since you just made me flash back to all the litcrit BS I had to survive in college.
If a future person says, "Adams meant for HHGTG to be a satirical examination of Western foreign policy in the late 20th century," and yet Adams wrote, "I meant HHGTG to be a farce. A romp. It doesn't mean anything," then Futuro-boy is obviously wrong.
If a future person says, "HHGTG is a stunning rebuke of commercialism and Western decadence," but Adams says, "HHGTG is a farce. A romp. It doesn't mean anything," then the future person's interpretation can still stand (pending review of the text).
I believe, currently, there's a certain plasticity in stories that readers must be allowed, so that they can enjoy the story more.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't mind when readers bring something to a work that the author didn't intend. But for that reader's interpretation of the text to be considered valid, we have to keep in mind that what they're really interpreting is their reading of the text, full of their own baggage. Anyone else reading it might have a different experience -- and, of course, that way lies deconstructionism.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Adams isn't necessarily the authority on the final meaning of his own work.
I was an English major, you know. So let me give you a heartfelt slap on this one, since you just made me flash back to all the litcrit BS I had to survive in college.
Tom, you're a nice guy so I'm going to ignore the condescension I read into this.
There remains some validity in the idea that a person's work can exist outside of his own personal mythology or approved interpretation. I find it hard to believe that you don't see any value in it- you are just arguing that in this case, Adams is right. He could be right. I simply want to point out that we as readers are not responsible to the writer to interpret his work in the way he claims to intend. Without trust in our own abilities and perceptions, what good are we as readers and critics anyway? I think of OSC's afterword to Empire- which seemed to be wanting to reinterpret the book for the reader, when there were serious flaws in the way the groups and characters were represented. Now, the afterword is also part of the book- but to take it at face value, and not judge the rest of the work for yourself, is to ignore all of those problems, and act as if they don't exist, or make the book less than it could be.
Edit: Scott made my point for me. Adams' intention and the final product are distinct things. He only gets to tell you what he intended, and you don't have to believe him. Besides, there's plenty of room outside what he directly intended that shows his experience with the world, and how he dealt with it.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: Anyone else reading it might have a different experience -- and, of course, that way lies deconstructionism.
I personally believe that, valid or not, each person contributes to the history of a given piece of artwork, until it is either eliminated in its direct effect on our culture, or consumed in it. Either way, everything eventually becomes drained of meaning over time- we either identify so much with a work, that everything in it is reflected in us, or we become so distant from it, that it makes no sense to us at all.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
